Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLucas, Billen_US
dc.contributor.authorGreenway, Margareten_US
dc.contributor.editorWilliam Ritteren_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-24T09:05:58Z
dc.date.available2017-04-24T09:05:58Z
dc.date.issued2008en_US
dc.date.modified2009-11-20T05:19:05Z
dc.identifier.issn07339437en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:5(613)en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/26765
dc.description.abstractThirty well-established 240L bioretention mesocosms were used to investigate retention of dissolved nutrients by bioretention systems. Ten mesocosms were comprised of 80 cm sandy loam, ten of 80 cm loamy sand, and ten of pea gravel with 20 cm of loamy sand. Half were vegetated with shrubs/grasses, while the other half had no vegetation (barren). In the first part of our study, the loam and sand mesocosms were dosed with synthetic storm water comprising 0.8 mg L-1 total phosphorus (TP) and 4.8 mg L-1 total nitrogen (TN). TP retention in the vegetated loam was 91% compared to 73% in the barren, and TN retention was 81% compared to 41% in the barren loam. TP retention was 86-88% in the sand treatments, while TN retention in the vegetated sand was 64%, compared to 30% in the barren. In the second part of our study, all 30 mesocosms were loaded weekly with 45 cm of tertiary effluent with high nutrient loads (22.3 m year-1 hydraulic load at a flow-weighted average of 4.5 mg L-1 TP and 4.8 mg L-1 TN, or 1,012 kg ha-1 year-1 TP and 1,073 kg ha-1 year-1 TN). After 50 weeks of loading, cumulative TP retention was 92% in the vegetated loam, 67% in the sand, and 44% in the vegetated gravel. However, TP retention by barren media was 56% in the loam, 39% in the sand, and 14% in the gravel. Cumulative TN retention was 76% in the vegetated loam, 51% in the sand, and 40% in the vegetated gravel. In contrast, maximum TN removal by barren media was 18% in the loam. The increase in TP retention by vegetated systems substantially exceeds phosphorus uptake rates for plants, suggesting that other processes are involved. The increase in TN retention by vegetated systems also exceeds nitrogen uptake rates for plants, suggesting that denitrification is involved.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers)en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.pubs.asce.org/en_AU
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationYen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom613en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto623en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue5en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of irrigation and drainage engineeringen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume134en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_AU
dc.subject.fieldofresearchSoil Sciences not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEnvironmental Technologiesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchWastewater Treatment Processesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode050399en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode090703en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode090409en_US
dc.titleNutrient Retention in Vegetated and Nonvegetated Bioretention Mesocosmsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.date.issued2008
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record